Self-study
Columnist: Tagowa's testimony in the Pemberton trial was not heard outside the courtroom, so we cannot be sure what she said. ██████████ ████████ ███ ████████ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████████ ██████ ██████ █████ ███ ████ █████ █████████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ████ ███ ███ ██ ███ ████ ███████ ████████ ████████ ██████████
Summarize Argument
The columnist concludes that some jurors must not have believed Tagowa’s testimony. His reasoning is that she stated after testifying that she believes Pemberton is guilty, while the jury found Pemberton not guilty.
Identify and Describe Flaw
We don’t know what Tagowa was called to testify about. Therefore, contrary to the columnist’s assumption, we don’t know if her testimony indicated that she thought Pemberton was guilty. It’s thus possible that the jurors both believed her testimony and found Pemberton not guilty.
13.
Which one of the following █████████ █ ████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██████████
a
It overlooks that █ ███████ ███ █████ ████ █ █████████ ██ ██████ ████ ██████ ████ █████████ █████████ ██ ██ ███ ██████████ ███ ██████████
Tagowa’s testimony could have been entirely unrelated to her reasons for believing that Pemberton is guilty. If so, the jurors could have believed Tagowa while still finding Pemberton not guilty.
b
It confuses facts █████ ████ ███████ ██████ ███████ ████ █████ █████ ████ █████ ██ ██ ███ █████
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing is with ought; it isn’t applicable here, because the author never makes a claim about what ought to be the case.
c
It presumes, without █████████ ████████ ████ ██████ ████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ██ █████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ██████ ████ █████ ████ ███ ████████
The columnist never opines on the actual guilt of Pemberton, so this can’t be the flaw.
d
It presumes, without █████████ ████████ ████ █ ██████ ███████ █ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███ ██████████
The columnist concludes that the jury didn’t believe Tagowa, not that they thought she was dishonest. You can disbelieve a statement without questioning the speaker’s honesty.
e
It fails to ████████ ████ ████ ███████ █████████ ████████ ████ ████ █████ █████ ███ ████████████ ██ █ ██████████ ████████ ██████████
The columnist does consider this: he concludes that not all jury members believed Tagowa’s testimony. This suggests that jurors disagreed about how much significance to attach to her testimony.